How about CIV stop being RACIST!!!

[Huxley Hobbes]

Ok, I've not looked over too much of the thread, but I'll throw in a short post anyways.

As has been said, one of the main reasons for the choice of civs in the game is the target audience. Specifically, North America, Australia, New Zealand, and Western Europe. Other places are inevitably going to be secondary targets, if the games are even available there. Now, does it make sense to include the Maurya or Gupta empires at the expense of Portugal or Canada, given this? (I would love for all four to be in the game, incidentally, and many, many more besides.) Ethnocentrism is not necessarily a calculated malignancy, it is simply that most people don't learn where Mali is in school (I confess, I thought it was somewhere near Vietnam and Cambodia until recently.), and the only apparent effect the Zulus had on world history was to unify a lot of tribes to make European purchases of slaves easier.

Another factor to be taken into account is that civs often get grouped together. For example, we do just get India, not Vedic, Maurya, Gupta, Mehrgrah, and Indus Valley civilizations. Similarly, we get Korea, China, and Japan representing the Orient. Why? Well, the Orient is probably the only other place where these games have a chance of sales, and moreover a significant proportion of westerners display an interest in the Orient. I know I love having all three of those, and Korea and China are two of my four most played Civs in III by a long way. (Germany and America, if you're wondering.)

It would be great to have a lot more civs in the game, representing not only more nations but also more periods of empires (Shang, Three Kingdoms, Warring States, and Qin dynasty China are all distinct and had very different things to deal with, and different effects on the world.); on the other hand, do we really need a hundred and three civs, especially when only 20 can be used in a single game? I actually think the answer is to provide a slightly more varied range of civs (Keep the ones from the Americas, keep the European ones and Middle Eastern ones, and add a few from Africa, the Orient, and Polynesia.), then allowing players to define their civs to a greater degree during the game (Which does seem to be the angle CivIV is heading for.)

 

[K.F. Huszár]

i think we should close the "racism" part of this post. it is true that sometimes blck people, and sometimes white people are victims to racism.
It is also true that "mainstream" media is more sensible to black victims than white ones.

 

[doronron]

Ya, we are. We've gone from arguning about why there arn't many African civs, to arguing about Ghafhi, to whether or not Hannibal is black, to why you think a civ should be in the game, and back to arguning about African civs.

Now I'm getting disey.

Well, I do understand where Joey's coming from. Both pimpmasta and Ghafhi came to this board with chips on their shoulders. While I understand and support their enthusiasm for more African civs, their methods were a bit...offensive. In Ghafhi's case, he spent as much time demeaning and belittling non-African cultures as he did championing the cultures he wanted to see in the game. Pimpmasta at least showed a little more tact after his first post.

Anyway...this subject's pretty much dead. Much of the stuff that's been discussed in the last couple of pages have more to do with ancient military history than racism. Time to start a new thread, guys?

 

[Superkrest]

ill second that call. ive stoped responding because of how off subject this has become.

 

[Legionary37]

We don't need more Afrian civs. We already have two, Egyt, and Mali (Is Carthage included also?) Those are both in Africa, hence, they are African. The amount of civs we have is fine, if we add more, we'll just have redundant bonuses and unique units like we got with Conquests.

 

[Princeps]

Egypt and Carthage are MEDITERRANEAN civs, not subsaharan African civilizations.

 

[FieldMarshall]

Orginally posted by doronron
Time to start a new thread, guys?

Got any ideas?

 

[Carver]

Excuse me I should have been more clear. I was not referring to all blacks, I was referring to those blacks with a chip on their shoulder like the first poster "pimpmasta" to whom I was responding.

As for the fact that "mainstream blacks" have never complained about their representation in sports I disagree. For instance certain blacks (Jesse Jackson) have continuously complained about the lack of black head coaches in the NFL. In reality there is nothing to complain about as blacks are about 13% of the population and are about 16% (5 out of 30) of head coaches. Hispanics and other non-whites do not complain about this even though there are more Hispanics in this country than blacks.

I really have no desire to belabor the point but:

Hispanics aren't 50% of the players in the NFL, blacks are. With 50% of the players but only 16% of the coaches black, some may reasonably conclude that there are serious impediments to career advancement for blacks in the NFL - most coaches were players.

Anyway my point is not to disparage blacks as I have many black friends. I am simply pointing out the obvious racism of "pimpmasta". He is not African, he is American. America is represented. Look my ancestors were from Lebanon but I never complained that previous itterations of Civ had no Arabs. Heck, it never even crossed my mind. The fact is "pimpmasta" can get away with racism but if a white were to say something like "there are too many African Civs" they would be called a racist.

I haven't read this whole tread but any disparaging of non-African cultures simply because they are non-African is clearly wrong.

 

[Legionary37]

Egypt and Carthage are MEDITERRANEAN civs, not subsaharan African civilizations.

Are they in the continent of Africa? Yes. Hence, they are African nations, because they are from Africa. African. As in, from or of Africa.

 

[doronron]

Got any ideas?

I already began one. "History, Video Games, and Civ"

 

[Princeps]

Are they in the continent of Africa? Yes. Hence, they are African nations, because they are from Africa. African. As in, from or of Africa.

They are in the Continent, but they are not in the african world.

It does not matter exactly where they are, what matters is what they are, and what culture they have.

The Carthage and Mali are seperated by a huge, dry barrier, called sahara, that is why Egypt and Carthage are Mediterranean Civilizations not African Civilizations.

We are not talking about continents we are talking about cultural locations, there is no such continent called mediterranean, but there is, or was, such cultural area.

 

[Crayton]

I found an old 1960s World History book with one chapter dedicated to our favorite continent. "Africa: The Black Continent"

If you say 'Africa', you are referring to the whole continent.
If you say 'Sub-Saharan Africa', then: the part of the continent that is mostly black.

That’s the way the tectonics crumble.

 

[Japanrocks12]

True, African civilizations should gain equal representation with civilizations from any other region. But the knowledge about Africa's history, the sole basis upon the categorizing of their people into distinct cultural groups, much less civilizations is more limited than it is for Asia or Europe per se. This is possibly the reason.

 

[Joey_Ramone]

I really have no desire to belabor the point but:

Hispanics aren't 50% of the players in the NFL, blacks are. With 50% of the players but only 16% of the coaches black, some may reasonably conclude that there are serious impediments to career advancement for blacks in the NFL - most coaches were players.

By the same token then you can say that there is serious impedement to whites, Asians, Hispanics and others for career advancement as players

I haven't read this whole tread but any disparaging of non-African cultures simply because they are non-African is clearly wrong.

Look I'm not black but I am Arab and "olive skinned". I come from a place where people were "racist" and attacked me (as a young boy) and my parents because we were Christian. That may not technically be racism because it's religion and not a race but it has the same effect. My parents came here to escape that treatment. No one takes racism more seriously than someone like me from my background. That is why I get so mad when people drop the race card where it doesn't belong.

You may disagree with the creators of Civ or whatever, but to call them racist is simply ridiculous and unfair to them. If anything the creators of Civ have gone out of their way not to offend anyone. There are over 250 posts in this thread and very few people have called out the person who started this thread. The original thread is absolute bunk, and in my opinion racist in it's own way.

 

[DrMadd]

Cleopatra was a Greek, and Hannibal was more closely related to Ariel Sharon than to Nelson Mandella. So far as I Know, the only other major civilization movement from Africa was maybe the Nubians, but they were on and off part of Egypt for most of their history.

 

[rhialto]

@Drmadd
Aren't you forgetting the Mali/Songhay/Ghana group, as well as the Ethiopians, and whoever it was that built Zimbabwe (the ancient ruins, not the modern city)?

 

[DrMadd]

What is the legacy of the Songhay/Mali/Ghana groups? Ethiopia I understand, and as for Zimbabwe, it was unheard of till the Zulu got there.

 

[Crayton]

Ghana/Songhay/Mali traded people for gold, got rich, introduced Islam to Sub-Saharan Africa, built cities (not Mongol yurt cities), and controlled trade across the Sahara for 1200 years until the Portuguese found a way around the desert.

 

[rhialto]

What is the legacy of the Songhay/Mali/Ghana groups? Ethiopia I understand, and as for Zimbabwe, it was unheard of till the Zulu got there.

Fame isn't that essential a requirement for the oldest civs. Most people today only know of Babylon through the Revelations book in the Bible, and not as an actual historical empire.

 

[Azale]

Wow, way to drop the race issue where it DOESNT belong. I hate seeing people cry "RASCISM!" everywhere because I think its offensive to those who are subject to rascism and where rascism truly is a problem.

Africa has plenty of civilizations, Mali was created specifically to appease those wanting a Mid-African civ and they also have Zulu. I would like to see Siam represented before we add another Mid-African civ.

End of story, get over it if you dont like it